They've ruined the bookmarks
-
some-random-username last edited by
I wrote the post when I was still angry, having just discovered the new bookmark system. The first I knew of all this was when Opera told me there was a new update, which I downloaded - so Opera jumped from version 12 to 25. A hell of a change, and literally the first I knew about the engine change at all.
I'm glad the programmers are still working on the bookmarks - there's clearly a lot to be done. More emphasis on usability, less on looking pretty, please.
So the sidebar isn't coming back? That's... disappointing, to say the least.
-
al-khwarizmi last edited by
In which case, there would be no end of further complaints of Opera being a Chrome-clone. It seems Opera developers just can't win... if they try to create anew, they're "hungry" - if they try to copy, they're "cloners".
They can win. If they copied the features from Opera 12, instead of from Chrome, they would make the user base happy.
-
lamajama67 last edited by
I can't seem to locate this on any forum but when I switched to a brand new computer, going from an XP machine
to a Windows 7 64 bit machine, my Opera jumped from V12 to V26. The issue is that my bookmarks DID not move to
the new W7 machine when the computer store set up the W7 machine. I still have the old XP computer and just copied the bookmark file but cannot see how to/where to insert or copy the file for Opera 26.Is it not possible to "manually" insert the old bookmark file into Opera 26?
-
blackbird71 last edited byIn which case, there would be no end of further complaints of Opera being a Chrome-clone. It seems Opera developers just can't win... if they try to create anew, they're "hungry" - if they try to copy, they're "cloners".
They can win. If they copied the features from Opera 12, instead of from Chrome, they would make the user base happy.
I disagree. The devs would still lose. Features from one browser architecture can't be simply copied into a different browser architecture. Such features have to be designed all over again to support the new architecture, and the effort needed can be seriously heavy if the architectural differences mandate it. For example, if the single-process structure of Presto Opera led to a straighforward ability to add side panels that could easily interact with the browser engines, the multi-process structure of Blink Opera could lead to tremendous coding difficulty when trying to functionally access something elsewhere in the browser (and in other processes) using a side-panel. If the devs spent their design effort trying to replicate Presto Opera's features in Blink Opera, the browser would likely still be largely on the drawing board and appear even more Chrome-like in nature - and that would lead to even stronger complaints.
Moreover, Opera appears to have decided at the outset to pursue a broader user market that they believed wasn't concerned with many of the Presto Opera features that appealed to the old user base. So no attempts were made to include many of those features in Blink Opera. As the Blink browser matures, the devs may have more time to devote to finding ways to include certain former features gradually, but when one realizes the many years it took to accumulate the Presto Opera feature and configurability set in that browser, it's likely to take quite some time for Blink Opera to evolve as well.
I state all this as an observer, not necessarily an advocate of the decisions that were made.
-
some-random-username last edited by
You say Blink Opera is multi-process. Is that why when I open it loads of Opera processes appear in the Task Manager, the CPU usage shoots up and the PC gets slow?
-
linuxmint7 last edited by
You say Blink Opera is multi-process. Is that why when I open it loads of Opera processes appear in the Task Manager, the CPU usage shoots up and the PC gets slow?
Yes, that's pretty much it, but on a modern multi-core computer with a decent amount of RAM there should not really be any significant slow down.
-
lando242 last edited by
Is it not possible to "manually" insert the old bookmark file into Opera 26?
It totally possible. Open up your old Opera install on your old computer and use the export bookmarks feature to export them as an HTML file. Copy that file over to your new system and use Opera 26's import feature to import from a file. Browser to where you saved the HTML file and you are all set.
-
volkerroennebeck last edited by
I have used Opera for years because of some features that made it different from other browsers, most importantly the bookmark feature that was "one-click"-accessible on the left side. With the current version it takes at least two clicks to get to the bookmarks, and then they cover the whole page.
Now that Opera looks like any other browser on the market, there is really no reason to use it anymore. If I wanted another Google Chrome, I would use Google Chrome.
It seems to me that Internet Explorer and Firefox are the only browsers that still offer "one-click"-accessibility for bookmarks, evrybody else does everything the can to drive users back to Microsoft and Mozilla.
I will try to use Opera version 12 until it does not work anymore and then it's bye-bye Opera and hello Internet Explorer. -
drgwalker last edited by
I've another bookmark question.
Is there any way to create a subfolder within a bookmark folder? I sure as hell can't find a workaround.
I have number of different subfolders that I want to include within one master folder but version 26 is only letting me create new folders at the higher level and not subfolders.
An advice would be welcomed as this is fairly important to me.
-
hardluck123 last edited by
What happen to the HOME icon? Do you have to go looking through the bookmarks to find what was HOME?
-
A Former User last edited by
Drgwalker: If you use the bookmark bar you can create subdirectories ad infinitum. Simply create an empty primary bookmark with your desired name, then drag it to the existing bookmark. It will appear at the bottom of the list but you can drag it to the top. Subdirectories will not sort according to title, so they will stay where you put them.
The Bookmarks Page is an unbelievable fudge-up. You can't drag anything anywhere. You can create new folders and add or remove them (click on My Folders) but I can see no way to create sub folders. Nor can I import bookmark bar folders. Personally, I wouldn't touch Opera bookmarks with a stick. The bar, imported from Chrome, works fine.
-
drgwalker last edited by
Thanks Bob - I spent an eternity today trying to fathom out a work around - simple when someone points out the solution.
Like you say, the bookmark function is a complete farce. It's fairly critical to what I need from a browser - I like a couple things about Opera, but this version 26 looks like a complete bodge.
I also use Firefox and their bookmark options are a piece of piss to work around.
Thanks again!
-
some-random-username last edited by
You say Blink Opera is multi-process. Is that why when I open it loads of Opera processes appear in the Task Manager, the CPU usage shoots up and the PC gets slow?
Yes, that's pretty much it, but on a modern multi-core computer with a decent amount of RAM there should not really be any significant slow down.
Okay, I do have quite a few windows open, but my PC isn't that old. It's seven years old, but things haven't advanced that much in that time, it handles everything else fine, and... okay, I'm just going to say it... Opera 12 never had any problems with them. Which makes the new Opera a big step back, not a step forward, for me.
-
lando242 last edited by
It's seven years old
The number of transistors on a microchip doubles every 2 years. This has been the law of the land since about 1965. Your PC that is only 7 years old is about 1/12th as powerful as a current PC. By the end of this year it will be 1/16th as powerful. By 2017, at 10 years old, it will be 1/32nd as powerful as a computer that will have just hit the market. Computers are not like cars. They don't keep being fairly current and useful 5, 10, 15 years down the line. They are like newspapers. They are yesterdays news the minute they are sold and decline in usefulness rapidly from there. You can't expect a system of that vintage to be able to handle modern programs. Its like complaining that your Playstation 3 can't run Playstation 4 games.
-
blackbird71 last edited by
...
Okay, I do have quite a few windows open, but my PC isn't that old. It's seven years old, but things haven't advanced that much in that time, it handles everything else fine, and... okay, I'm just going to say it... Opera 12 never had any problems with them. Which makes the new Opera a big step back, not a step forward, for me.I've been using computers since they had toggle-switches on the front to load binary code one word at a time. At every stage of usage since then, the hardest thing to accept has been how quickly a particular computer falls behind the current technology widely-employed in any given era. In that context, 3-4 years is becoming 'mature' for a computer. While I generally run a given system online out to 7-9 years, in every instance the last 2-3 years of such usage has been a real chore to keep the system current and to avoid it stalling-out. Standards change, hardware evolves, protocols change, memory demands grow, CPU cycles get consumed at ever-more staggering rates by the ordinary software (and sites) of the day. The sad reality is that a PC year is equivalent to 10 human years... so an average 7-year-old system is akin to an average 70-year old human: able to still do many things, but certainly no candidate for an Iron-man run.
A modern web browser and modern graphics-rich, video-laden websites are heavy loads for an older computer. At that point, one has to think in terms of lightening the load when considering a browser (or any other demanding software).
-
some-random-username last edited by
I really doubt my computer is that bad. It runs everything without problem, it runs 3D games except the really demanding ones with all graphical enhancements switched on (and yes, I know a good part of that is due to the graphics card) and we are always being told that advancements in PC technology have stagnated due to the effects of the consoles. In short, except for a few games that are particularly high-spec, it works as well now as it did then.
Telling someone that they have to buy a new computer in order to run their web browser properly is just ridiculous!
-
A Former User last edited by
Has anyone here had any success using the bookmark search bar?
I tryyyyyyyyy to type in a word - and blammo. If I'm not quick as a bunny, it takes the first two or three letters and off it goes, searching its idiotic heart out, bringing me nothing I want from my bookmarks. Stupidest thing I've ever seen.
I can not type a full word in the search bar. Can anyone?
-
blackbird71 last edited by
I really doubt my computer is that bad. It runs everything without problem ... In short, except for a few games that are particularly high-spec, it works as well now as it did then.
Telling someone that they have to buy a new computer in order to run their web browser properly is just ridiculous!Please don't take such comments in an upside down way. Rather than having to buy a new computer in order to run a web browser properly (compared with a seven-year old computer), perhaps you need to consider adopting a web browser or employ browsing techniques whose demands are more properly suited to a typical seven-year old system. That's what I noted above as being something of a necessary chore in the 7 to 9 year-old phase of life of my own systems. Because greater memory capacity and CPU horsepower indeed are available on every emerging generation of systems, emerging browser designs (like most other new software) are intended to make use of them, some designs more than others. Thus some software designs at any given time will be much more demanding than others on a given system, and this shows up first and worst on older systems. It becomes up to the user of older systems to select software, settings, and usage patterns that allow or enable such software to run smoothly on their systems - or chose something else that will run to their satisfaction. Most software designers are focused on the current generation of hardware and its capabilities, and will not spend much time focused on limitations found mainly in older systems.
Opera, Chrome, and other Webkit/Blink designs employ multiple-processes in their design, along with fairly hefty memory requirements. That taxes older systems in both the memory and CPU areas, and performance may suffer. Amongst even those browsers, different features and their implementations may further affect the loading of one compared with another. Regardless, if one is a many-tab user, the loading can become quite large, and performance become erratic or otherwise suffer on an older system. If one is a few or single-tab user, they may never notice issues on the same older system. The number of extensions demanded by the user also affects the loading, as does the content of the opened tabs. Only you can determine what software works best on your own system, what tweaks you need to make, and what limitations (if any) must or may result for your browser patterns.
-
twentyyearsoperauser last edited by
I've been using Opera for more than the last 15 years. But it looks to me like someone is ruining the greatest browser on purpose. I know that's not true of course. But it looks like that
And the new bookmarks system is one of the things which ruin the browser. -
lando242 last edited by
So use Opera 15. It had no bookmarks at all. You could also read some of the posts in this thread so you know whats actually happening and why things are the way they are.
